AMARSANG DAHYABHAI RATHOD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYALAmarsang Dahyabhai Rathod, Prop. Aekaldev Roadways, Mahadev Nu Faliyu, At Kavitha Bavla, Ahmedabad-382260. [PAN :AMSPR7095 L]
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay Condoned
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated
15.01.2024, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"
for short) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NIAC), Delhi has erred in passing an Ex-Parte
Asst. Year : 2017-18
- 2–
addition of Rs.10,47,000 made by the Assessing Officer on account of cash deposited in the bank account us. 69A. r.ws 115BBE of the .IT. Act,
1961. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer without appreciating the explanation furnished by the appellant with regards the source of cash deposited in the bank account being cash withdrawals made from the bank account, agricultural income and income from sale of milk.
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making observations with regards the agricultural income declared by the assessee of Rs 2,59,225 holding that agricultural expenses should be adopted at the rate 40 percent of the of the gross agricultural receipts.
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming action of the Assessing Officer in not accepting the source of sale of milk of Rs.3,25,000/- for depositing of cash in the bank account on the ground that no evidence has been furnished.
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer on assumptions, conjectures and surmises without bringing any material or evidence on record to establish that the explanation furnished by the appellant is not acceptable
7 The Learned Commissioner of Income -Tax (Appeals), National
Asst. Year : 2017-18
- 3–
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 23.03.2018, declaring a total income of Rs. 3,08,870/-. During the demonetization period, the assessee deposited cash of Rs. 13,47,000/- in his bank account. The Assessing Officer treated Rs. 10,47,000/- (i.e., Rs. 13,47,000/- less Rs. 3,00,000/- opening cash balance) as unexplained income under section 69A of the Act and passed an assessment order u/s 143(3) on 26.12.2019. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who affirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.
Before us, the assessee submitted complete details of withdrawals and sources, copy of which has been given to the Ld. DR. Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 4– 6. On going through the entire details and bank statements, we find that assessee had sufficient money in his accounts for making the deposits. Hence, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.07.2025 (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL)
VICE-PRESIDENT
Ahmedabad; Dated 29.07.2025
**btk
आदेश की ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. थ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु / Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयु(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीयितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, अहमदाबाद/ DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल/ Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.